Celebrate Wisely

The Darling Law Firm wishes you a Happy New Year! We would like to remind you to celebrate responsibly tonight. If you are driving, there will be others on the road who may have been celebrating less responsibly than you so please drive defensively. Also, remember that it only takes 2 drinks to put you over the legal limit in New Jersey and the police will be looking for those who may be driving under the influence tonight. Although you may stop drinking after the champagne toast at midnight, your blood alcohol level (BAC) only decreases by only .015% per hour while one standard drink, defined as one 12-ounce beer, one five-ounce glass of wine, and one 1.5-ounce shot of distilled spirits, will add .05% to your BAC each hour. This means that it will take much longer for your BAC to decrease than to increase. As it is difficult to tell when you have had too many, driving after consuming alcohol should be avoided. Please be safe so that you and your loved ones can enjoy a Happy New Year! DarlingFirm.com

DUI- Blood Required Without Probable Cause?

The New Jersey Assembly and Senate have proposed an amendment to the Driving Under the Influence Statute requiring a breath or blood sample be obtained at any time a person “operating a motor vehicle is involved in an accident resulting in the death or serious bodily injury of another person.” If passed, this will allow a breath or blood sample to be taken even if there is no probable cause or reasonable suspicion to believe the driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The requirements of probable cause and reasonable suspicion were established to protect the constitutional rights of the people from unreasonable search and seizure, which is exactly what this legislation would allow. In a statement as to the intent or purpose of the legislation, the Senate set forth in its statement regarding S-359, that the bill would “require police officers to obtain a breath or blood sample” in the event there is an accident resulting in death or serious bodily injury to another.” Often, the severity of injuries from a motor vehicle accident is unknown until days or weeks after the accident. Alcohol will not, and drugs may not, remain in a person’s system for as long as it takes to determine the seriousness of harm suffered from the accident. This is a slippery slope which will give rise to the “need” for taking of breath or blood samples from each and every individual involved in a motor vehicle accident with the stipulation that, if serious bodily injury does not occur the results will be suppressed. Following will be the issue that, even in the event there is not serious bodily injury, the State now has conclusive evidence that a defendant operated a motor vehicle on a public road in violation of the New Jersey Driving While Intoxicated statute, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50, which is a per se violation, whether there was a motor vehicle accident or not, and will lead to prosecution of defendants without the required showings of probable cause or reasonable suspicion every time a driver is involved in an accident and found to have any controlled dangerous substances (CDS) or a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08% or greater. The Assembly, in A-1225, has included a certain level of protection by adding that “a person operating a motor vehicle involved in the accident who the investigating police officer concludes has not contributed to the accident whatsoever shall not be required to submit a breath or blood sample.” Much like the time period required to determine whether serious bodily injury resulted from an accident, accident investigations often take time and will again give police the “need” to take blood or breath samples immediately so as not to lose potential evidence. DUI/DWI in NJ will have a serious impact on your life and can have significant implications in related matters such later personal injury or vehicular manslaughter charges. If you are charged with DUI in NJ you should seek an experienced attorney immediately to protect your rights. For more information on Driving While Intoxicated, reckless driving or other serious municipal court/traffic matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Blood Drawn For Medical Care Used in DUI Prosecution in NJ

In matters where probable cause exists to believe you were driving under the influence of intoxicating substances the police may obtain blood drawn for the purposes of treating you medically and test for the presence of intoxicants. Although driving on the roads of New Jersey creates an implicit agreement that, if you are suspected of DUI, you will provide breath or blood samples, you retain the right to refuse to provide such samples and face the penalties of refusal statutes instead. In cases where an accident has occurred, often the defendant is unconscious and cannot offer or deny consent. In other cases, a conscious defendant may consent to a physician or other hospital employee taking blood in the event a transfusion is needed or for other medical reasons outside the presence of law enforcement officers. In these cases there may be no request whatsoever at the time of treatment from police officers for consent to test the defendant's blood for intoxicants. However, the police may still attempt to obtain samples of the defendant's blood to prove guilt in a DWI case against the defendant. DUI/DWI in NJ will have a serious impact on your life and can have significant implications in related matters such later personal injury or vehicular manslaughter charges. If you are charged with DUI in NJ you should seek an experienced attorney immediately to protect your rights. For more information on Driving While Intoxicated, reckless driving or other serious municipal court/traffic matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Reckless Driving Is Reason for Revoking License in NJ

Municipal court judges are authorized, under N.J.S.A. 39:4-96, the reckless driving statute, to “revoke the license of any person to drive a motor vehicle, when such person shall have been guilty of such willful violation of any of the provisions of the motor vehicle code as shall, in the discretion of the judge, justify such revocation.” Although the argument has been made that this leaves municipal court judges with discretion to arbitrarily revoke driving privileges. The New Jersey Appellate court has set forth guidelines for revocation which are used to defend the decisions of municipal court judges regarding license revocation. The municipal judge should consider “the nature and circumstances of the defendant’s conduct, including whether the conduct posed a high risk of danger to the public or caused physical harm or property damage; the defendant’s driving record, including the defendant’s driving record, including the defendant’s age and length of time as a licensed driver, and the number, seriousness, and frequency of prior infractions; whether the defendant was infraction-free for a substantial period before the most recent violation or whether the nature and extent of the defendant’s driving record indicates that there is a substantial risk that he or she will commit another violation; whether the defendant’s conduct was the result of circumstances unlikely to recur; whether a license suspension would cause excessive hardship to the defendant and/or dependents; and the need for personal deterrence. Any other relevant factor clearly identified by the court may be considered as well. It is not necessarily the number of factors that apply but the weight to be attributed to a factor or factors. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. Reckless driving charges in New Jersey should not be taken lightly.If you face reckless driving, DUI/DWI, CDS in a motor vehicle or other serious offenses in municipal court, you should consult an experienced criminal law attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on municipal court matters or other criminal law matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.

DUI Statute Changes Will Allow You to Keep Driving in NJ

The success of ignition interlock devices required for NJ Driving Under the Influence convictions and breath test refusals has been so effective at preventing future intoxicated driving that new legislation has been proposed. S-2427, sponsored by Senator Nicholas Scutari of Union County, was advanced by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The measure would require a first time offender with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08-.10% to have an ignition interlock device installed for 3 to 6 months and a first time offender with a BAC over .10% to have the device installed for 7 to 12 months. The ignition interlock device would be required in any vehicle the individual owns, leases or is a primary driver of. Once the device is installed, the individual would be entitled to a provisional license to drive to work or certain other approved places. Failure to install the device would be a disorderly persons offense. Drivers who do not lease, own or regularly drive a vehicle will have their licenses suspended for the time periods set forth above. Individuals with drug related DUI would be subject to installation of the interlock device for the same periods as those driving while under the influence of alcohol. This represents a substantial shift in the way DWI cases are managed. Presently drivers are subject to suspension resulting in severe financial hardship, including job loss, as a result of inability to operate a motor vehicle. Presently, drivers with BAC of .15% or more are subject to installation of the interlock device for 6 months after the license suspension period ends. In line with the current suspension periods, under the proposed legislation, second-time offenders would be required to install the device for 2-4 years and third-time and subsequent offenders would be required to install the ignition interlock device for 10-20 years. If you are facing DUI charges, you should consult an experienced driving while intoxicated defense attorney immediately in order to preserve your ability to commute to work, transport your children, attend medical appointments and the like. For more information on motor vehicle, municipal court and other criminal law matters, in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Limitations of Police as Witnesses at a NJ Criminal Trial

At trial, physical specimens, such as weapons used in commission of a crime, are used as evidence to convince jurors of certain facts. However, the prosecution or defense must use verbal testimony to explain their case to the jury. Even physical evidence has little significance without adequate explanation of why it is being presented. In light of the critical nature of verbal testimony at trial, there are written rules of evidence relating to how evidence may be presented. When a prosecutor or defense attorney questions a witness, they are asking carefully contemplated questions in an effort to have the witness state certain facts to the jury in a way that proves their own client's case. If the questions are out of line in some way, the attorney for the other party will object to the question. Similarly, there are written rules regarding what certain witnesses may testify to. Witnesses may be presented as qualified experts regarding certain issues in a case which allow them to offer "expert testimony" as to those particular issues. Most often, prosecutors use police and victims to make a case against the defendant. This is where an experienced and skilled defense attorney can make a big difference in the outcome of the defendant's case. Police may testify about the facts of an event but may not give opinion testimony unless they are qualified as experts to give such testimony. In a recent case, a defendant was charged with possession of a controlled dangerous substance (CDS) with intent to distribute, possession of CDS with intent to distribute within a school zone, employing a juvenile in a drug-distribution scheme and conspiracy to distribute CDS. The New Jersey court held that testimony offered by police of their beliefs regarding the occurrence of a crime, the involvement of a juvenile in the alleged crime and the character of the neighborhood in which the alleged crime occurred was opinion testimony inadmissible at trial. The court held the opinion testimony of the police to be so prejudicial to the defendant that a new trial was ordered in the matter. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you face criminal charges you should consult an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on criminal law matters, including municipal court matters, in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.

DUI Defendants loss An Opportunity To Escape Guilt in NJ

The main evidence used against drivers accused of driving under the influence is the Alcotest result. The Alcotest accuracy depends on multiple factors including calibration of the machine and various components thereof. It also depends on multiple other factors which the 20 minute observation period and removal of radios and cell phones from the room are designed to compensate for. The New Jersey Court recently held that defendants are not permitted to examine the rooms in which the machine is housed or the observation period occurs unless they have "a particularized" reasonable basis to believe the room's design or location had an actual bearing on their testing results. Although the Appellate Court ruled against the inspections because they found the Alcotest had been proven to be "well-shielded from" potential interference in prior matters the legislature called for a 20 minute observation period prior to administration of the Alcotest as well as including the requirement that all radios and cellular devices be removed from the room. The differing opinions of the legislature and judiciary in this matter leave this issue ripe for further dispute. DUI/DWI in NJ is not taken lightly in any case and can have significant implications in related matters such later personal injury or vehicular manslaughter charges. If you are charged with DUI in NJ you should seek an experienced attorney immediately to protect your rights. For more information on Driving While Intoxicated, reckless driving or other serious municipal court/traffic matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Drivers Can Be Charged With Multiple Refusals as a Result of a Single Event in NJ

In State v. Nunnally, 420 N.J. Super. 58 (App. Div 2011), a defendant in was charged with refusal to submit to a breath test under the DUI statute but not under the CDL statute. When the officers were alter unable to prove that the driver was under the influence, they attempted to charge the defendant with refusal to submit to a breath test under the CDL statute. The Bergen County court addressed the matter and concluded that CDL refusal is not a lesser included offense of a general DUI refusal because each requires proof of a different set of facts and the Appellate Division affirmed. The CDL refusal statute requires proof the arresting officer had probable cause to believe the person had been operating or was in actual physical control of a commercial motor vehicle on the public highways or quasi-public area with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .04% or greater. This differs from the general DUI statute which requires proof the driver is under the influence of intoxicants rather than simply having a BAC of .04% or greater. As a result of the officers failure to charge him with CDL refusal within 90 days of the incident Nunnally was only held to account for the general DUI charge. Although Nunnally escaped prosecution under the CDL refusal statute, it is an uncommon event that officers would not bring complaints for all significant charges against a driver, including the often minor issues which gave rise to probable cause in the matter. Penalties for DWI are severe, including jail, loss of license, significant fines, court ordered counseling for drugs and alcohol as well as installation of ignition interlock devices. Interlock devices are expensive to install and require payment of monthly fees, as well as visits to certified inspectors to insure proper operation of the device during the install period. If you are charged with a DUI, you should seek experienced defense counsel immediately to protect your rights. For more information on DUI, driving while intoxicated, refusal to submit to an Alcotest (formerly Breathylizer), CDL refusal, CDS in a motor vehicle or other serious driving related charges visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.

Failure to Give Appropriate Breath Test Refusal Warning Can Result In Acquittal in NJ

Refusal to give a breath sample in a DUI matter carries substantial penalties including mandatory minimum 7 month loss of driving privileges and fines up to $500 for a first offense to a minimum 10 year loss of license to $1,000 fine for a third or subsequent offense. Additionally, if you refuse to submit a breath sample, you may still be convicted of DWI based on the officer's observations while you perform field sobriety tests. In the event you elect not to submit a breath sample into the Alcotest machine and are still charged and convicted with DWI, you will face a loss of license for each offense. Due to the severity of the penalties for refusal being akin to those for the underlying driving under the influence charge, the legislature has structured the warnings given in the event of a refusal to be of the same stricture as those issued for driving while intoxicated. In the recent case of State v. O'Driscoll, Harding Municipal Court Judge Gary Troxell found O'Driscoll guilty of refusal, DWI and possession of an open container of alcohol and Morris County Superior Court Judge Ironson affirmed the conviction on appeal. The Appellate Division overturned the conviction on the grounds that failure of arresting officers to read the current refusal warnings did not satisfy the intent of the legislature in the preparation and requirement of the specific statement regarding the consequences of refusal to submit to breath tests. DUI/DWI in New Jersey is not taken lightly and if you are arrested for these charges, or refusal to submit to a breath test, you should seek an experienced attorney to assist you in your defense. Selecting an attorney who knows your rights and is able to avoid a conviction based on mistakes by officers in their attempt to prove your guilt is the difference between keeping or losing your license, as well as a host of other problems that come with a refusal conviction in NJ. If you are charged with refusal to submit to the Alcotest or DUI contact an attorney immediately to protect your rights. For more information on Driving While Intoxicated or other serious municipal court/traffic matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Speedy Trial Still the Rule in NJ?

A driver was stopped for speeding in Lincoln Park, New Jersey and charged with DUI as a result of the stop. In an effort to challenge the officer's probable cause to initiate the stop, the defendant sought discovery regarding the Stalker Dual SL model radar detection device used by the officer to determine his speed. After being convicted in the Lincoln Park Municipal Court, defendant sought a trial de novo and in the Morris County Superior Court, Law Division, Judge Philip J. Maenza found the defendant guilty of DUI and speeding. Defendant sought review by the Appellate Division under claim of violation of his right to a speedy trial. The Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to a speedy trial which attaches at the time of arrest. In the case at hand, State v. Vanderkooy, the Appellate Division looked to the prior decision in State v. Szima, in which the New Jersey Supreme Court recognized the 4 factors, previously set forth by the US Supreme Court, as determinants of a speedy trial violation. The 4 factors are the length of delay, whether defendant asserted his right to a speedy trial and the prejudice, if any, caused to defendant by the delay. In the case at hand, much delay was caused by the need to establish the reliability of the radar detection device and neither party was to blame nor substantially prejudiced by the delay. If you are charged with a criminal or serious traffic offense you should contact an attorney immediately to protect your rights. For more information on your right to a speedy trial when facing criminal charges or serious traffic charges including Driving Under the Influence in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

DWI Acquittal Results in Dismissal of Vehicular Manslaughter Case In NJ

Defendant was charged with DWI, vehicular manslaughter, possession of marijuana, paraphernalia, reckless driving and CDS in a motor vehicle. Defendant was acquitted of the DWI but was found guilty of all charges. Defendant appealed the vehicular manslaughter charge because the Model Jury Charge did not instruct that the DWI acquittal needed to be taken into account. The New Jersey Appellate Court held that the erroneous instructions relative to the DWI constituted reversible error. The Appellate Court also found that instructing the jury on the concept of "recklessness" without comparison to the concept of "negligence" was erroneous. The conviction for vehicular manslaughter was vacated. DUI/DWI in NJ is not taken lightly in any case and can have significant implications in related matters such later personal injury or vehicular manslaughter charges. If you are charged with DUI in NJ you should seek an experienced attorney immediately to protect your rights. For more information on Driving While Intoxicated, reckless driving or other serious municipal court/traffic matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Must You Provide A Urine Sample in A NJ DUI Arrest?

On July 2, 2012 the New Jersey Appellate Court heard the case of State v. Verpent (A-3807-10T4). Verpent was found guilty of DUI and challenged the failure of Bergen County Superior Court Judge Jerejian to suppress the lab results from his urine sample. The Appellate Division upheld prior cases requiring the submission of urine and its use in proving Driving Under the Influence Cases. Once an officer's observations lead to a conclusion that an individual is under the influence of intoxicants, the officer may request the performance of field sobriety testing in the event that the officer believes the individual may safely perform the tests. If the field sobriety tests provide further evidence of intoxication, the individual will be asked to provide a breath sample into an Alcotest device. If the individual's blood alcohol level (BAC) is under the legal limit or non-existent and the officer believes drugs may be causing the inability to perform tests, a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) will then perform further testing along with obtaining urine and sometimes blood samples from the accused. N.J.S. 39:4-50.2(a) requires all drivers to consent to submission of urine and blood samples upon an officer's request. Although defendant challenged the taking of his urine without a warrant, the Court held that the officer's observations gave rise to probable cause to arrest and exigent circumstances justifying taking of a urine sample without a warrant under the theory that delay could result in "destruction of evidence." Although urine screens are not always accurate and the results are subject to challenge, the NJ courts have long required defendants in driving while intoxicated matters to provide urine specimens and there is "no federal constitutional right to prevent being required to giving a urine sample". State v. Malik (534 A.2d 27 (App. Div. 1987) DUI/DWI in New Jersey is not taken lightly and if you are arrested for these charges you should seek an experienced attorney to assist you in your defense. Selecting an attorney who knows your rights and is able to avoid a conviction based on mistakes by officers in their attempt to prove your guilt is the difference between keeping or losing your license, as well as a host of other problems that come with a refusal conviction in NJ. If you are charged with DUI contact an attorney immediately to protect your rights. For more information on Driving Under the Influence or other serious municipal court/traffic matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Should a Confession Given While Under the Influence Be Suppressed in NJ?

A defendant convicted of second-degree illegal possession of a weapon won a motion to suppress the confession and had the guilty verdict overturned based on his being under the influence at the time he confessed. The motion was granted on the basis of defendant's preconfession statements to police that he was not mentally fit at the moment due to drugs coupled with inquiries he made regarding waiver of his right to counsel which indicated lack of adequate understanding thereof. Prior to obtaining a confession, the police are required to unscrupulously honor your request your rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present. If police fail to appropriately determine whether you are able to understand your rights while under the influence of drugs, you may be entitled to a suppression of evidence. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you are facing criminal charges as a result of a confession and believe you may be entitled to suppression of the confession, you should consult an experienced traffic law attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on suppression, confessions, weapons charges, drug charges or other criminal law or municipal court matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.

State Must Prove Operation of Vehicle to Win DUI Case in NJ

In NJ, courts have the discretion to broadly construe "operation" of a motor vehicle to include intent to drive while intoxicated. Intent to drive while under the influence has been proven by as little as sitting in a vehicle with the keys in your possession. There is not a true "motion" requirement for the vehicle and the arresting officer need not witness operation. However, no matter how amorphous the definition of "operation" may be, the fact remains that the prosecution bears the burden of proving the defendant was impaired, had the means to operate a vehicle in very close proximity and the intent to operate said vehicle while still under the influence of drugs or alcohol. A DWI in New Jersey carries serious consequences. If you are charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs such as heroin, cocaine, marijuana or ecstasy or prescription drugs such as oxycontin, percocet, roxycottin, valium or other drugs which may hinder your ability to drive, even if you have a prescription for them, you should consult an experienced DUI attorney immediately in order to ensure your rights are protected. Before conceding guilt, your matter should be fully reviewed by an experienced attorney to prevent you from being convicted when the state does not have adequate evidence to prove it's case. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you are charged with a crime, you should consult an experienced DUI attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on driving while intoxicated, driving under the influence, controlled dangerous substances (CDS) in a motor vehicle or other criminal law matters in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.

NJ Assembly Looks to Criminalize DUI With Young Passengers

Currently pending in the New Jersey Assembly is a which would result in criminal penalties for driving under the influence with a person under 17 in the vehicle. Driving under the influence includes liquor, heroin, cocaine, marijuana, oxycodone (oxycottin), percoset, Escasty, methamphetamines, morphiene, xanax, vicodin, percodon, fentanyl, adderall, nembutal, ritalin, dexedrine, valium, suboxone, diazepam, roxycontin, or any narcotic, hallucinogenic or other controlled dangerous substance. This means if you are taking your own prescription and a police officer finds your driving abilities to be hindered beyond an acceptable level by your prescription, you may be not only charged with a DUI but also face criminal penalties. If this legislation is passed, the DUI statute N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 would be modified to include a person guilty of DWI with a passenger 17 years of age or younger in the car is also guilty of a crime of the fourth degree if the violation does not result in bodily injury to the minor. If the minor suffers bodily injury as a result of the driving while under the influence offense, the driver will be guilty of a crime of the third degree. In addition to the above charges the driver will be required to attend an additional Intoxicated Driver Resource Center program concerning responsible operation of a motor vehicle while transporting a minor. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you are facing DUI charges, you should consult an experienced DUI attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on DUI, drug charges, other criminal law matters or traffic violations in New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com.

NJ Alcotest Trial

A guilty verdict in a DUI can have serious consequences including loss of license, heavy fines and even incarceration.
If you have been charged with DUI in New Jersey, there are ways in which you can beat the charges. The Prosecutor MUST prove, by clear and convincing evidence, you were 1) operating a motor vehicle and 2) under the influence an intoxicant.
Provided it is possible, the accused is typically forced to submit to "field sobriety tests" by a trained officer. Of course, this is a subjective test and may be affected by many issues such as inner ear infections and other issues causing balance problems, disabilities or injuries causing balance or mobility problems, eye problems and other medical conditions or medicines.
In NJ you will also be asked to submit to an Alcotest (formerly Breathylizer) which determines the amount of alcohol in your blood by taking a breath sample. Although the officer administering the test will claim it is infallible, there are multiple parts to the machine which all must be working properly. A trained DUI attorney knows the parts of the machine subject to attack and how to go about proving they were not working properly at the time the Alcotest was administered to the accused. Additionally, there are certain conditions under which the test must be administered which a trained DUI lawyer is aware of and knows to look for. Finally, the officer administering the test must not only follow proper procedure but must be certified to perform the test as well.
We also have trained experts available to assist you in your case against a DUI matter. These experts were former Alcotest operators and trainers who trained the offices to use the alcotest machines. They know how to help us beat a DUI.
If you have been charged with DUI in Morris, Sussex, Bergen or Passaic County, New Jersey visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com for more information or contact us directly at 973-584-6200 to get the help you need.
A DUI is a serious matter and should not be faced alone.
For more information about us or a DUI visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com